IOC won't be compensating NHL for using players, but...

[Fugu]

Doesn't that include paying all employees, renting/buying office space, maintaining that office space, etc? Because that could most likely easily add up to the 8%, especially if the IOC has hundreds of employees stretched across the globe, meaning that going to meetings would include long plane trips and hotel stays which would be subsidized by the IOC.

How many employees do they have? Offices and where? Yes, it might include all of these things, but are they paying a few guys CEO salaries, or thousands of little people everywhere? (I don't know so someone who does can chime in.)

Still looks and sounds like a business promoting and ensuring its own existence.

I'm pretty sure biathlon was #2 in worldwide ratings IIRC. I think cross-country has more viewers than alpine events as well.

The Russian and German audiences really tip the scales in those departments.

Is there any information on what non-US broadcasters pay for the rights?

 

[Theokritos]

Is there any information on what non-US broadcasters pay for the rights?

The European Broadcasting Union (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Broadcasting_Union) allegedly paid about 485 Mio. € for the rights to broadcast the 2006 Winter and the 2008 Summer Olympics and about 600 Mio. € for the rights to Vancouver 2010 and Sotchi 2014.

EDIT: As of today, 600 Mio. € match 773.894 Mio. $

 

[Killion]

How many employees do they have? Offices and where? Yes, it might include all of these things, but are they paying a few guys CEO salaries, or thousands of little people everywhere? (I don't know so someone who does can chime in.) Is there any information on what non-US broadcasters pay for the rights?

The IOC's headquartered in Lausanne. 115 individuals worldwide, who are either co-opted to their posts or voted in by secret ballot every 8yrs. No idea what their annual salaries, per-diems', expenses might be as its not disclosed. Broadcasting revenues come in from virtually every nation on earth so trying to determine how much the non-North American, British, French & Spanish contribute on top of their billions is impossible to determine (Finland, Sweden, Holland, Belgium etc etc etc) without exhaustive search. These funds are dispensed to the games host nations to aide in staging, and to every participating nations individual Olympic Committee's, who in turn use the funds to support their own activities.

 

[kdb209]

Is there any information on what non-US broadcasters pay for the rights?

The US Network/Cable deals provide > 50% of all Olympic broadcast revenues - ie they pay more than the rest of the world, combined.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704625004575089601324767666.html

The World Watches (And Pays)

Amount broadcasters paid for the rights to the 2010 and 2012 Olympics (Winter and Summer games are negotiated together).
COUNTRY NETWORK PRICE 2010 MEDALS
U.S. NBC $2 B 32
Europe* European Broadcasting Union $760 M 129
Japan Japan Consortium $362.5 M 4
Canada CTV $153 M 17
Italy Sky Italia $152 M 4
Australia Nine $113.5 M 3
China CCTV $99.5 M 10
Brazil Record $60 M 0
Philippines Solar $2 M 0

Source: International Olympic Committee
*European rights were sold jointly

Also - the US Networks (NBCU/Comcast, ABC/ESPN, FOX, CBS/Turner) are considering offering bids on the next 4 Olympics - '14 Sochi, '16 Rio, '18 (not yet awarded), and '20 (not yet awarded) - rather than just the typical 2 Olympic package - with bids expected to be in excess of $4B.


http://sports.espn.go.com/oly/news/story?id=5993055

edit: It looks like the IOC has already awarded the European rights for Sochi & Rio -

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/18/sports/18iht-olytv18.20285494.html

IOC awards European broadcast rights to Sportfive
Published: Sunday, November 8, 2009

LONDON — The IOC awarded the European broadcast rights for the 2014 and 2016 Olympics to a leading sports marketing agency Wednesday in a deal worth €250 million ($316 million), a big revenue boost at a time of economic crisis.

Sportfive was granted rights for all media platforms - including free and subscription television, Internet and mobile phones - across 40 countries in Europe for the 2014 Winter Games in Sochi, Russia, and 2016 Summer Olympics, whose host city will be selected in October.

The agreement does not include broadcast rights in France, Germany, Italy, Spain, Turkey and Britain. The International Olympic Committee already has deals with broadcasters in Italy and Turkey, and will begin direct negotiations in the other four countries "in due course."

...

Added to the earlier deals in Italy and Turkey, the IOC has now reached a total of €427 million or $540 million in European rights fees. With deals in Europe's four big markets still to come, the IOC is hopeful of surpassing a total of €850 million or $1 billion.

That would be a 30 percent increase on the €672 million or $850 million in its current deal with the European Broadcasting Union for the 2010 and 2012 Olympics.

...

The partnership with Sportfive replaces the IOC's long-lasting rights deal with the EBU, an umbrella body of public broadcasters that had held Olympic rights for more than 50 years.

The IOC rejected the EBU's bid last year for the 2014-2016 rights, deciding to seek a better deal elsewhere.

...

The EBU paid $443.4 million to show last year's Beijing Olympics and $135 million for the 2006 Winter Games in Turin, Italy. The EBU also bought rights for the 2010 Vancouver Winter Olympics and 2012 Summer Games in London for $746 million in 2004.

 

[Killion]

The US Network/Cable deals provide > 50% of all........with bids expected to be in excess of $4B

Wow. You never cease to amaze with your ability to dig-up the facts!.... Thanks....

 

[Fugu]

Wow. You never cease to amaze with your ability to dig-up the facts!.... Thanks....

Even better. Once he digs 'em up, he never forgets where he puts them. I have "re-found" things many times.

 

[AllByDesign]

It should be noted that in light of the fact that the TV rights include both summer and winter olympics, it even further mitigates the relevance of NHL participation.

 

[kdb209]

It should be noted that in light of the fact that the TV rights include both summer and winter olympics, it even further mitigates the relevance of NHL participation.

The rights fees for the Summer Olympics have recently been ~50% higher than those for the Winter games - a roughly 60/40 split in the rights fee packages.

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/olympics/2003-06-06-nbc_x.htm

IOC President Jacques Rogge said NBC paid $820 million for the 2010 Winter Games, a 34% increase from the network's $614 million figure for Torino, Italy in 2006. He said NBC's price of $1.181 billion for the 2012 Summer Olympics was 32% higher than the $894 million for the 2008 Olympics in Beijing.

 

[Killion]

Even better. Once he digs 'em up, he never forgets where he puts them. I have "re-found" things many times.

He must have some pretty sophisticated Search Engine Optimization Options' on his Blackberry huh?.

It should be noted that in light of the fact that the TV rights include both summer and winter olympics, it even further mitigates the relevance of NHL participation.

To some extent, however, hockey with the star power of the pro's participating is one of the Olympics' few "Glamor Events", pushing the IOC's rapacious financial appetite beyond gamma & out of sight. The broadcasters are the Caterers, the pros's the Waiters in this Bacchanalia of over-indulgence. And never mind the host cities, who can charge north of $5000 for a couple of seats to a qualifying game, the scalpers can grab a cool $50,000-$100,000 for a pair to the finals. Come on Sochi. Russians are absolute masters of the "cash deal"....

 

[Turboflex*]

IOC President Jacques Rogge said NBC paid $820 million for the 2010 Winter Games, a 34% increase from the network's $614 million figure for Torino, Italy in 2006. He said NBC's price of $1.181 billion for the 2012 Summer Olympics was 32% higher than the $894 million for the 2008 Olympics in Beijing

It is debatable how important the hockey tournament is the the olympics, but it is the 2nd most popular event in north america (after figure skating) and provides content for the whole 2 weeks. You have to imagine the hockey tournament factors for a decent chunk of that 820 million, and the tournement would be valued somewhat differently if it were Spengler Cup teams instead of NHL. That is how you put a $ value on NHL participation, we don't know what it is since we are not privy to secret NBC/IOC contracts, but you can be sure that their braintrust has negotiated a value to it.

The IOC's headquartered in Lausanne. 115 individuals worldwide, who are either co-opted to their posts or voted in by secret ballot every 8yrs. No idea what their annual salaries, per-diems', expenses might be as its not disclosed. Broadcasting revenues come in from virtually every nation on earth so trying to determine how much the non-North American, British, French & Spanish contribute on top of their billions is impossible to determine (Finland, Sweden, Holland, Belgium etc etc etc) without exhaustive search. These funds are dispensed to the games host nations to aide in staging, and to every participating nations individual Olympic Committee's, who in turn use the funds to support their own activities.

Total IOC contributions were almost $480 million. (to VANOC for 2010)

So the IOC collected like $1.5b for 2010, but only 1/3 of that went to the local committee who was building & organizing everything. So what happens to the other 1 billion $ or so that the IOC collected?

I went to the IOC site and glanced over their "marketing fact sheet" http://www.olympic.org/Documents/fact_file_2010.pdf but it doesn't say too much, though it does show that the IOC hauls in about 2 billion per year these days. Could not see listed expenses approaching anything near that, but maybe I'm missing something? Spending $500 million on vancouver is a pittance though, the IOC is hauling in so much why was VANOC taking hundreds of millions from the Canadian taxpayer??

The whole thing reeks, the hockey could do a lot better than being hitched to this gong show.

 

[Killion]

The whole thing reeks, the NHL could do a lot better than being hitched to this gong show.

I took the liberty of editing your post, from "hockey" to "NHL".... Bolded.

 

[Turboflex*]

I took the liberty of editing your post, from "hockey" to "NHL".... Bolded.

I thought about that, but kept it as "hockey" because a world cup benefits the Euro leagues too, and anything that benefits all the international pro leagues trickles down to hockey development worldwide. For a world cup, revenues, publicity, hosting & scheduling all work exclusively for the hockey tournament & the sport itself.

The IOC/olympics work for itself and all its crummy little gimmick sports, and is basically a parasite on the hockey tournament which has landed on their lap courtesy of René Weasél.

I don't know why so many european posters here are so reactionary about this.

 

[AllByDesign]

So the IOC collected like $1.5b for 2010, but only 1/3 of that went to the local committee who was building & organizing everything. So what happens to the other 1 billion $ or so that the IOC collected?

I believe Killion has the list on Page 1 of the thread.

 

[kdb209]

So the IOC collected like $1.5b for 2010, but only 1/3 of that went to the local committee who was building & organizing everything. So what happens to the other 1 billion $ or so that the IOC collected?

http://sports.espn.go.com/oly/news/story?id=5993055

TV rights fees provide the bulk of the IOC's revenue, with the U.S. share accounting for more than half the total. About half the money goes to host cities, with the rest split among the IOC, international federations and national Olympic committees.

Under the current NBC deals, 12.75% of the US rights fees go to the US Olympic Committee.

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/olympics/2003-06-06-nbc_x.htm

The USA network typically supplies about 60% of the Olympics TV rights fees, which support most of the IOC's revenue. The U.S. Olympic Committee gets 12.75% of the USA rights fee.

 

[Jussi]

I thought about that, but kept it as "hockey" because a world cup benefits the Euro leagues too

Please elaborate how a World Cup benefits European leagues?

 

[LadyStanley]

http://nhl.fanhouse.com/2011/01/12/...re/?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter

International Ice Hockey Federation president Rene Fasel suggested at the World Junior championships last week that the NHL will not get any financial compensation for Olympic participation, something that reportedly had been on the NHL's wish list. Not according to Bettman, however.

"We've never discussed revenue sharing with the IIHF or the IOC," Bettman said. "In fact, we've never discussed any of the issues that may have to be addressed if we're going to consider going forward in the future. Mr. Fasel said over the summer we would only go to Europe over his dead body, and we never said we were going to Europe. Every now and then he likes to make statements which somehow don't have any basis in the things we are thinking about or talking about. But Rene's a good friend and he shares with us a desire to grow the game of hockey."

 

[Turboflex*]

haha Bettman basically calling Rene Weasel an idiot.

 

[Killion]

haha Bettman basically calling Rene Weasel an idiot.

"But, Rene' is a good friend and...."

 

[Zine]

I thought about that, but kept it as "hockey" because a world cup benefits the Euro leagues too, and anything that benefits all the international pro leagues trickles down to hockey development worldwide. For a world cup, revenues, publicity, hosting & scheduling all work exclusively for the hockey tournament & the sport itself.

The IOC/olympics work for itself and all its crummy little gimmick sports, and is basically a parasite on the hockey tournament which has landed on their lap courtesy of René Weasél.

I don't know why so many european posters here are so reactionary about this.

Considering the NHL's lukewarm Olympic stance (particularly that of non-NA games) why would they agree to share a significant portion of revenue, hosting & scheduling, etc. with Euro leagues?

How is a small allocated amount of home games for each NA team, and/or World Cup set in Europe beneficial to the NHL?.........especially considering hockey, in and of itself, isn't a big enough sport for a World Cup to generate significant revenue worldwide.

Likewise, (in terms of growth of the game) hockey isn't a big enough sport to sell itself by means of its own tournament...particularly if only 'top 7' countries are included. A World Cup would simply be preaching to the converted. Go ask somebody in a non-traditional hockey country what the World Cup/Canada Cup (or even Summit Series) is/was. They would have no clue.

A World Cup does nothing but benefit the NHL, the Olympics benefit the sport.

 

[Killion]

A World Cup does nothing but benefit the NHL, the Olympics benefit the sport.

Im sorry, but I find that argument to be a rather hollow platitude. "Growing the game" through particpation in the Olympics is an extremely expensive ideal, a bitter pill for the league to swallow every 4 years. They (nor the PA) receive zero compensation nor access for suspending operations & putting at risk their most valued assets, star players. I simply dont buy your argument that only through the Olympics' that hockey finds itself preaching to the un-converted. A World Cup or re-birth of a Summit Series format that benefits the Euro Leagues, the KHL & the NHL along with the players would be of far more benefit financially & IMHO philosophically from a promotional standpoint than hitching their wagons' to what is nothing more than a one sided gravy train for the IOC & the host nation.

 

[MaskedSonja]

Im sorry, but I find that argument to be a rather hollow platitude. "Growing the game" through particpation in the Olympics is an extremely expensive ideal, a bitter pill for the league to swallow every 4 years. They (nor the PA) receive zero compensation nor access for suspending operations & putting at risk their most valued assets, star players. I simply dont buy your argument that only through the Olympics' that hockey finds itself preaching to the un-converted. A World Cup or re-birth of a Summit Series format that benefits the Euro Leagues, the KHL & the NHL along with the players would be of far more benefit financially & IMHO philosophically from a promotional standpoint than hitching their wagons' to what is nothing more than a one sided gravy train for the IOC & the host nation.

Neither Pro nor Con, but is there any information out there that shows how much of an effect that having NHLers in the Olympics has grown the game more than Pre-NHL involvment?

EDIT: So, what I'm reading, the NHL has been involved since mid 98?

 

[Killion]

Neither Pro nor Con, but is there any information out there that shows how much of an effect that having NHLers in the Olympics has grown the game more than Pre-NHL involvment?

EDIT: So, what I'm reading, the NHL has been involved since mid 98?

Yes, the past 4 Winter Games; signed on to particpate in 2014 at Sochi in Russia. Thereafter, unless Fehr absolutely pushes for it in the next CBA, hopefully not. Any data about how NHL player participation in the Winter Games "grows the game" is purely anecdotal & is used as an emotional argument by those in favor of it. Sold on emotion, justified with faulty logic, as is the cost benefit argument pursuant to bidding on & or hosting summer or winter games, the latter enjoyed by a handful of wealthy northern hemispheric countries, all of which are more than familiar with the sport. Any suggestion that the leagues subservience to the IOC "grows the game" insults the intelligence. The "Miracle on Ice" in 1980, 31yrs ago, absolutely "grew the game" in the US, however, that was then & this is now. The NHL, the PA, the KHL & the Euro Leagues collectively could do a whole better on their own with a World Cup or whatever.

 

[Eisen]

I'd agree with that and it wouldn't surprise me that the downhill skiing events were 2nd.

I agree with that. But Biathlon 2nd all the way

 

[Killion]

I agree with that. But Biathlon 2nd all the way

TV ratings spike by country per sport based on its likelihood of winning. Nordic events in Finland, Sweden, Norway etc; Alpine skiing in Austria, Swirzerland, Italy & so forth, Ratings by sport are hard to track. Their were over 300 stations & over 500 on-line sites airing the games out of Vancouver. Here in Canada, it was estimated that close to 80% of all households were tuned in to the Gold Medal hockey game for at least a portion with ratings in the US approaching those of the 1980 final at Lake Placid between the US & Soviet Union.

What should be worrying the IOC is that the demographics are predominantly older, with nearly 60% under age 30 having little or no interest in the games, winter or summer. The richest broadcasting contracts & corporate sponsorship dollars stem from North America. Americans will tune in to see a Shaun White on the Halfpipe winning Gold, all 4.5 minutes worth, ditto Canadians with boarding & freestyle, Norway with Biathalon etc. but thats about it. The Opening Ceremonies & the Gold Medal Hockey Game are the penultimate ratings booster for the Olympics, yet they fail, miserably & miserly, to work in conjunction with the custodians & keepers of the talent pool upon which they rely in order to maximize profit & keep the flame alight. A free-ride for a multi-billion dollar enterprise.

 

[MaskedSonja]

TV ratings spike by country per sport based on its likelihood of winning. Nordic events in Finland, Sweden, Norway etc; Alpine skiing in Austria, Swirzerland, Italy & so forth, Ratings by sport are hard to track. Their were over 300 stations & over 500 on-line sites airing the games out of Vancouver. Here in Canada, it was estimated that close to 80% of all households were tuned in to the Gold Medal hockey game for at least a portion with ratings in the US approaching those of the 1980 final at Lake Placid between the US & Soviet Union.

What should be worrying the IOC is that the demographics are predominantly older, with nearly 60% under age 30 having little or no interest in the games, winter or summer. The richest broadcasting contracts & corporate sponsorship dollars stem from North America. Americans will tune in to see a Shaun White on the Halfpipe winning Gold, all 4.5 minutes worth, ditto Canadians with boarding & freestyle, Norway with Biathalon etc. but thats about it. The Opening Ceremonies & the Gold Medal Hockey Game are the penultimate ratings booster for the Olympics, yet they fail, miserably & miserly, to work in conjunction with the custodians & keepers of the talent pool upon which they rely in order to maximize profit & keep the flame alight. A free-ride for a multi-billion dollar enterprise.

And that, my friend, in part, IMO due to shifting generational interests. As you pay people under 30 don't seem to follow the whole olympics. Why do you think they have the half-pipe, sno cross and ski-cross type events? To attact the younger demographic. A casual, totally impersonal survey I did over the olympics-people I spoke to in their 40's and up were fairly well up on events. The younger crowd, 30 and under, were "well if there's nothing on, maybe the hockey game" "men's or women's" I asked. They looked at me like I was on something (I wasn't, really! ) and they said "Umm, mens." Some of them didn't know the women had a team!


Watching all sorts of sport interests over the next 25-30 years is going to be VERY interesting-to see what the younger generation tunes into.


I wonder how long before MMA style figure skating takes to the ice.....